Menu

What Makes a Man?

When I was compiling the material I was going to use for my second book, Preventive Medicine, I chose to use the essay Vulnerability in the hopes that I might be able to dispel one of the more egregious fantasies about masculinity – that vulnerability is in some way a strength for men. At the time I was rebutting the Mark Manson claim that men’s vulnerability was a necessity in whatever it was he used to consider Game, or the idea that a lot of Purple Pill hacks like to cling to about men’s vulnerability being some foundation upon which a “healthy” relationship ought to be built on. This trope is pulled straight from the Oprah / Dr. Phill handbook and really the belief that a man’s vulnerability is in someway a strength is part of a Blue Pill conditioned belief set that young boys are taught from a very early age.

Go to any woman’s dating advice for men blog today and you’ll likely read some variation of it. It’s actually part of our pop-psychology social consciousness – transvaluation is a very common theme; reversing weakness with strength has been the order for feminizing men and masculinizing women since the Sexual Revolution. I can remember hearing this ‘advice’ since the late 80s on any number of daytime talk shows. Reading this pabulum coming from ‘dating coaches’ with any association to the Red Pill was enough for me to want to dispel the notion. That, and the need for men to get in touch with their Jungian feminine sides as a means to better identifying with women and thus eventually getting laid by all the women who supposedly swooned for vulnerable, sensitive and emotionally available men (also known as ‘Beta Orbiters’).

However, as I was editing that essay for inclusion in the book I realized that what I was considering wasn’t so much the transvaluation of vulnerability and strength, but the model upon which the Feminine Imperative would like to convince men is appropriate and best suited for women’s needs in a relationship. The provable fact that women’s Hypergamy predisposes them to being aroused by men who display the most opposite aspects to this vulnerability (Dark Triad traits for example) doesn’t seem to matter; vulnerability is only beneficial to women seeking comfort and security in a long term partner.

In that essay I outlined a few things about what masculinity has become in a post-Sexual Revolution female-primary social order:

For the greater part of men’s upbringing and socialization they are taught that a conventional masculine identity is in fact a fundamentally male weakness that only women have a unique ‘cure’ for. It’s a widely accepted manosphere fact that over the past 60 or so years, conventional masculinity has become a point of ridicule, an anachronism, and every media form from then to now has made a concerted effort to parody and disqualify that masculinity. Men are portrayed as buffoons for attempting to accomplish female-specific roles, but also as “ridiculous men” for playing the conventional ‘macho’ role of masculinity. In both instances, the problems their inadequate maleness creates are only solved by the application of uniquely female talents and intuition.

Perhaps more damaging though is the effort the Feminine Imperative has made in convincing generations of men that masculinity and its expressions (of any kind) is an act, a front, not the real man behind the mask of masculinity that’s already been predetermined by his feminine-primary upbringing.

Women who lack any living experience of the male condition have the calculated temerity to define for men what they should consider manhood – from a feminine-primary context. This is why men’s preconception of vulnerability being a sign of strength is fundamentally flawed. Their concept of vulnerability stems from a feminine pretext.

Masculinity and vulnerability are defined by a female-correct concept of what should best serve the Feminine Imperative. That feminine defined masculinity (tough-guy ridiculousness) feeds the need for defining vulnerability as a strength – roll over, show your belly and capitulate to that feminine definition of masculinity – and the cycle perpetuates itself.

I returned to this essay today because I think that over the past six months we’re seeing a strengthening push from the Feminine Imperative to clamp down on what we’re to believe should be an acceptable expression of masculinity. In essence the imperative (or the Village if you like) has been using every mass shooting tragedy to reiterate what masculinity should mean to men. And, failing this, the hope is still that men will be confused as to what conventional expressions they can subjectively define it in, in a more female-correct way.

The Feminine-Correct Paradigm

Since the most recent school shooting in Florida, the focus on what constitutes masculinity has come to the forefront of our social consciousness. What exactly is masculinity they keep asking, and then provide definitions that only have meaning to a social order that’s founded on female social dominance. They are definitions that most men heard repeated constantly as boys from their overwhelmingly female-taught and feminine-primary educations. Since the beginning of the Sexual Revolution and the rise of Fempowerment boys and men are expected to grow up into a female-defined masculinity. Boys are acculturated in contexts that feminize them, yet we are meant to believe that all the horrors of Patriarchal masculinity are still being taught to them today:

Two decades ago, the psychologist William Pollack wrote that boys start out sensitive but through a “shame-hardening process” — told to stop crying, to be a man — they learn to hide what they really feel. And if they don’t know or understand their own feelings, how can they care about anyone else’s?

This has become something of a cliché. And the truth is, there’s no single culture of boys, but many. In my memories of adolescence, beneath the constant ribbing and occasional pyromania, we had tremendous affection for one another. And we longed to connect with women with an intensity that was difficult to contemplate.

This was a quote from Real Men Get Rejected Too. It’s a good illustration of the paradox masculinity presents to parents and educators. The idea that boys are these sensitive delicate souls who, through the evils of their Patriarchal (typically male) upbringing, are conditioned to become ‘macho’ violent men is a popular trope. After Nikolas Cruz killed 17 kids at school it was the go-to rationale. “Boys are brought up to be violent gun-loving beasts thanks to a perpetuated misogynistic culture of men” or some variation of this is common. It’s an easy, digestible, info-bite that sounds right because we’ve heard it for so long. If only boys we’re taught more like girls to get in touch with their emotions and were vulnerable in expressing them we could avoid these male-created tragedies.

That’s the pretense we’re supposed to believe – and it’s important that a larger society does believe in the inherent evilness of masculinity if the Feminine Imperative is to maintain social dominance. But the truth is boys have been systematically feminized for the past 3-4 generations. Boys are taught like defective girls. Since the 1970s it is increasingly women who have dominated academia from kindergarten to doctorate degrees. The entire western education system is founded on a feminine-primary, feminine-defined teaching methodology. In the process of advantaging girls to the utmost efficiency in school (to fempower adult women) the educational atmosphere had to be defined by what best served girls. School and teaching became ‘for girls’ and the educational landscape shifted to teaching styles that girls were most benefited in.

In that shift the idea that boys might be disadvantaged had little bearing, but overtime the conditions of teaching ‘to girls’ defined the teaching style as the correct style. In fact, teaching in a way that girls learn best, and disciplining boys for not learning this way, is no longer a style – it is just the way children are taught. Boys and men today are the product of female teachers who actively advantage girls at the expense of boys. So normalized is this teaching that boys disrupting the advantaging of girls in class is something we’ve decided needs to be medicinally curbed. Boys being boys is diagnosed as an illness and drugs are prescribed so as to sedate them long enough for the girls to learn.

This focus on empowering girls isn’t limited to the classroom. In every form of early childhood through adolescent media, music, social networks and social exchanges this theme is continued; girls have the future in their reach, boys are potential rapists and criminals if they don’t fall in line with female-correct way of how things just are. I get asked a lot about what I think defines Blue Pill conditioning and I’d say this ambient social theme of fempowerment is a strong basis for it. Boys are not taught this old-school, much-feared Patriarchal masculinity, they are bombarded with themes of how masculinity is incorrect, laughable, and a shameful ‘act’ that boys have to put on to cover the ‘real’ female-correct versions of their sensitive selves. Boys are taught from the earliest age that being a boy is an incorrect mask, while being a girl, learning like a girl, emoting and relating like a girl is ‘real’ and the correct way of developing a personality.

Boys are systematically taught to make women and womankind their Mental Point of Origin. This is why it is so difficult for men to unplug and abandon their old Blue Pill selves; feminine-primacy was literally conditioned into them since they were kids.

Nikolas Cruz, like many other teenage shooters is the product of this feminine-primary education system, not a Patriarchal “teach boys not to cry” machismo school. He is a monster of their creation; one taught to cry on demand and emote like a girl. He’s the result of a participation trophy mentality that demonize men and masculinity to the point that he never learns how to bounce back from defeat, rejection or simply life’s adversities. No men and no masculinity is available to teach that kid how to harden up and be resilient, or how that masculine discipline is not bullying or hazing, but a necessary part of a boy’s maturation into a masculine man.

But to throw society off the trail a false narrative of hyper-masculinity ruining our otherwise feminine-correct boys is perpetuated. When the next school shooting takes place the Village will again want the public to believe it’s masculinity and men’s fault for what is really his emotional outburst. The Village will attempt to place the responsibility on men, on fathers, while in the meantime perpetuating the idea that men/fathers are superfluous at best, a societal burden at worst. Men are useful catspaws in so many ways, and in perpetuating this narrative the Village reinforces the female-correct theme for grown men too.

One of the primary way’s Honor is used against men is in the feminized perpetuation of traditionally masculine expectations when it’s convenient, while simultaneously expecting egalitarian gender parity when it’s convenient.

For the past 60 years feminization has built in the perfect Catch 22 social convention for anything masculine; The expectation to assume the responsibilities of being a man (Man Up) while at the same time denigrating asserting masculinity as a positive (Shut Up). What ever aspect of maleness that serves the feminine purpose is a man’s masculine responsibility, yet any aspect that disagrees with feminine primacy is labeled Patriarchy and Misogyny.

Essentially, this convention keeps beta males in a perpetual state of chasing their own tails. Over the course of a lifetime they’re conditioned to believe that they’re cursed with masculinity (Patriarchy) yet are still responsible to ‘Man Up’ when it suits a feminine imperative. So it’s therefore unsurprising to see that half the men in western society believe women dominate the world (male powerlessness) while at the same time women complain of a lingering Patriarchy (female powerlessness) or at least sentiments of it. This is the Catch 22 writ large. The guy who does in fact Man Up is a chauvinist, misogynist, patriarch, but he still needs to man up when it’s convenient to meet the needs of a female imperative.

It’s important to review this premise if we want to understand the real intent the Feminine Imperative has in redefining masculinity for men. Aspects of conventional masculinity are useful for women, and masculine duty (appeals to men’s “honor”) is a means to access it while avoiding the aspects that would in any way advantage men over women. Conventional masculinity is largely disparaged and parodied in order to disenfranchise men, but men are still needed to save women from natural disasters and protect them from physical harm (so long as they never expect sex for it). On some level of consciousness women understand the transactional and validational aspects of sex. They know that men’s serviceableness comes with an implied transactional cost, so to circumvent this women had to be put in charge of defining what masculinity should mean to men.

Masculinity as defined by men is almost always illegitimate and inauthentic in a feminine-primary world order. The presumption is that “macho man” ridiculous masculinity is a mask that men wear. That mask is meant to cover their true feminine-correct selves; because men cannot be authentic in any other context than the taught, feminine-correct context. So, of course, men can only be fakes or insecure of their masculinity (the masculinity defined by the feminine) and can never ‘really’ be that strong, dominant male apart from the permission the Feminine Imperative gives him.

Because the Feminine Imperative controls the overall context for what should be correct for men this has the effect of making women the sole deciders of what is masculine. In effect, and in this Blue Pill context, women become the gatekeepers of manhood. If masculinity imbues men with manhood (literally being considered a man) a ‘man’ is only whom a woman will designate as such within her presumed, feminine-correct context. In other words, do the imperative’s bidding and it dubs you a ‘man’.

Breaking the Cycle

As you might’ve guessed, this social dynamic conflicts with women’s Hypergamous imperatives. A Beta who thinks he’s a ‘man’ and presumes entitlements because of that is a woman’s worst fear. A Beta transgressing into a manhood that the imperative didn’t give him is the making for a guy being considered a sexual predator. However, an Alpha man, a man of high sexual market value still needs to accept the feminine-correct social frame, but he must also know his role within that frame. I’ve made the comparison in the past that women only see men as either draft animals or breeding stock. In a feminine-correct paradigm the breeding stock must know that his conventionally masculine aspects mean different things to a woman (Alpha Fucks sex) than the draft animal’s masculine aspects (Beta Bucks service). As such, masculinity and a designation of being a man becomes a constant qualifier for a Beta male. Manhood becomes a carrot he follows to pull the feminine-correct cart.

In fact, Beta men hold their female-correct ‘man’ designation as an unwitting point of pride. Examples abound of self-righteous Betas AMOGing other men for not being ‘real men’ (according to the imperative) like themselves. What they’re ignorant of is that this self-righteousness is defined by how well they conform to the masculinity that the imperative tells him is useful – and avoiding the ‘toxic’ masculinity it also defines for him – all according to his role in the scheme of a woman’s sexual strategy.

Should a man awaken from this Blue Pill conditioning and coronate himself as a ‘man’ outside the approval of womankind, this is when he’s ridiculed as an old school Patriarch and an anachronism of the old male-incorrect social paradigm. This is the control the imperative has against men stepping out side this female-controlled masculinity. The first response any female critic has for men who make themselves their mental point of origin is to remove that status of manhood.

Because they don’t accept feminine-primacy this disqualifies them from ‘real’ manhood.

One of the most difficult aspects men face in unplugging and living in Red Pill awareness is the social stigma that follows when they remove womankind from the pedestal and make themselves their mental point of origin. He gets called an asshole, he gets called selfish, he gets called a misogynist, but he’s also “less of a man” because he no longer conforms to the definition of masculinity that the Feminine Imperative has taught him from his earliest memories. Learning to redefine his mental image of what makes a man a man in his own Red Pill aware state is tough. Most of what he considered the very limited and controlled aspects of an ideal masculinity are a big part of the Blue Pill idealism he was raised on. This transition to conventional masculinity is also hampered by a deep learning of shame and gender loathing for finding anything positive in masculinity.

These are some important things to keep in mind if you are moving into a Red Pill awareness and learning to live in a new paradigm based around a conventional understanding of masculinity that isn’t inherently evil. It’s hard to do, but that old mental model of masculinity your teachers (all of them) convinced you was incorrect is something you must unlearn and cut yourself away from. Know that women don’t just long for that dominant masculinity, they needit for the health of their own life experiences. They need the protection, the comfort, the security and the discipline that masculinity balances their lives with.

Women ask, “where have all the ‘real’ men gone?”, but they exist outside the presumed, feminine-correct paradigm they mistakenly believe they have a secure control of. They don’t want to let go of that, so they will fight you to maintain a control over masculinity (which by definition can be chaotic as well as comforting) that they never really had – even with all the social engineering.

Just reading a quote in Time magazine’s rundown of Black Panther: T’Challa and Killmonger are mirror images, separated only by the accident of where they were born….. “What they don’t realize”, Boseman says,” is that the greatest conflict you will ever face will be the conflict with yourself”.

(Just a throwaway comment, please don’t get into the movie Black Panther at this juncture. Please don’t.)

I’m pasting this portion from Rollo’s “Good Humans” post because there will be men finding “THE RATIONAL MALE” for the first time today with this Rollo Tomassi post “What Makes A Man?” Each man that realizes the truth that he was not born evil because his “DNA is flawed” will find some peace in the words from Josh Ishiro Finney.

The following is a reblog of Josh Ishiro Finney’s A Letter to Boys & Young Men of America. Josh had this post and his blog attacked in the wake of the school shooting in Florida this week and I felt it was impactful enough to warrant a reblog here. Having written many a post on the war on conventional masculinity – and really the better part of my book Positive Masculinity – I wanted to extend my support for his commentary.” ~Rollo Tomassi

A response to mass shooting in Florida.

The bodies aren’t even cold yet and already you are being blamed.

Yes you.

All of you.

The boys and young men who will grow up to become one half of America’s future.
Once again, due to society’s failure to raise you, to teach you, to properly guide you on your path to manhood, your mere existence is being held responsible for seventeen more deaths—this time in Florida, and once again, at a school. The headlines of the last few days say it all:

“Toxic white masculinity: The killer that haunts American life”
-Salon

“Toxic Masculinity Is Killing Us”
-The Boston Globe

“Toxic Masculinity Is Killing Us”
-Harpers Bazaar

“Don’t Blame Mental Illness for Mass Shootings; Blame Men”
-Politico

In the handful of decades I’ve been alive, I’ve seen America shift from a culture of responsibility to one of blame. We don’t solve problems anymore. We cry, we pray for, we seek to find closure, and then finally, slaughter a sacrificial lamb for our sins. When I was young and Columbine happened, that lamb was Marilyn Manson and video games. Before that, it was D&D and Twisted Sister. These days, though, as body counts continue to rise and excuses continue to vanish, the lamb America has chosen to sacrifice is you. Rather than take responsibility for the seeds we’ve sown, the culture we built, and the disaster you’ve been left to inherit, we as a nation have chosen to lie to ourselves. To listen and believe those who claim that the answer is simple: “Boys are simply born bad.”

As an aging Gen Xer watching this tragedy unfold, I can’t help but look back at my youth and realize we were the dry run for this “crisis of masculinity” as the media likes to call it.

In my time I’ve watched as fathers were pushed out of the home, separated from their children, and their role in society debased and devalued. Like you, I was taught male behavior was bad behavior. That I was broken and needed to be fixed. Drugs, therapy, mass socialization were required to save me from my most innate instincts—

—the need compete.

—the drive to create.

—the urge to protect.

—the desire for female affection.

Like you, I was told these instincts were not only wrong, but dangerous. That due to my Original Sin of being born a boy, I was destined to mature into a lustful monster and an oppressor of women. All this was burned into me before I even reached college, where campus policy actually assumed all men to be rapists waiting to happen.

It isn’t hard to see how we got here, to an age when America is more than willing to sacrifice its boys. To quote Fight Club, “We’re a generation of men raised by women.” And the women who raised my generation had a saying: All men are pigs. But there’s another saying those same women were enamored with and that is: The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world.

So here we are, coming close to fifty years of single mothers raising their boys as if they were animals. Two generations of young men raised to believe they’re broken, immoral, and dangerous. That their natural state, if left unchecked and unmedicated, is a sexual ticking time bomb of rape and abuse. Half a century of academia peddling a grim version of history that holds your gender personally responsible for all the wrongs ever to have happened in the world. And a press, that at this very moment, is blaming YOU for every school shooting to have ever occurred.

After all this, how could there not be a crisis of masculinity?

So to the boys and young men of America, believe me when I say it isn’t you who should be apologizing for the state of our world today. This mess was set in motion long before you were born.

You are not bad.

You are not broken.

You are not inherently evil or a sexual abuser in waiting.

You are boys who were robbed of your right to be men.

All your life you’ve been told to act, think, and behave like women. To suppress your passions, your pride, your need to compete and drive to achieve.

Now society is crumbling around us.

Feminizing boys didn’t make better men. It’s resulted in broken homes and shattered families and record suicide rates. It’s destroying any notion of a healthy partnership between men and women, and is pushing us ever closer to total collapse of gender relations.

Boys, we don’t need you to be like women, the world has plenty of women, already.

What the world needs now more than ever is for you to be men.

For you to grow-up, to grow strong, and do what men do.

For it is men’s strength and determination that tamed the wilderness, built civilization, and has kept the world fed despite all predictions we’d all die starving before the year 2000. It’s men’s curiosity that lead us to explore the oceans, to conquer space, and peer into the tiniest of microcosms of the human body. It was men who built the cities we inhabit, the luxuries we enjoy, the medicines that keep us alive. Men built the road, the plumbing, the electrical grid, the phone in your hand, the internet it’s connected to.

Men have always been innovators, explores, defenders, and leaders.

But most importantly, men have always been fathers.

So to the boys and young men of America, please read this and take every word to heart.

Truth. The world needs Rational (not Vulnerable) Men more than ever. By the way – really enjoyed the audio versions of TRM thanks to your excellent reading.

@Rollo

I understand that you are not taking requests for future posts… it’s just that you said something on a podcast recently, that referenced something Peterson has said also.

Namely that the Patriarchy exists in the minds of women. The ‘patriarchy’ is a social hierarchy that women have sustained in-order to help differentiate the high-status alpha males from the betas. We as men participate in this social construct in-order to ensure procreation. As you have also pointed out, we engage in this game so that we can help to determine paternity and secure a long-term partner.

While it’s clear that the social/status/hypergamous nature of the sexual marketplace is jointly created and maintained by both sexes – many of us engage with this dynamic in a mostly unconscious manner.

As adults we are all responsible for it’s impact on society. While women like to blame men for all of these (negative) impacts, they are very much the co-creators of this sexual/social dynamic.

I would appreciate your thoughts and insights into the deeply unconscious, and therefore dangerously repressed nature of this sexual dynamic. I know you have studied psychology, and openly recognised how hypergamy has been weaponised by various political factions.

The way I see it, is that vulnerability is like a fitness (shit) test. If you are openly vulnerable as a male, you are not high-status. You are not a secure, stable option. Openly pushing for vulnerability, helps weed out the weaker males. Brings them out into the open, so that they can be eliminated from the mating pool. This seems a brutally effective (mostly unconscious) methodology for optimising hypergamy. That’s the Rational (Unconscious) Female mind at work.

Your writing has evolved greatly over the last few years. I for one would love to read your thoughts on the unconscious nature of this dynamic. For me personally, knowing that much of inter-sexual game is hidden from the conscious self has helped with my own red pill rage. Women do participate in helping us evolve. While they cannot help us to become men, they can, and do help ensure the continuation of our species by (shit)testing for negative anti-masculine traits like vulnerability.

I think a lot of what the Manosphere, MGTOW, and MRA push back against in the feminine imperative (feminism), is largely unconscious in women. It is still dangerous to a man’s survival however, if adopted as a blue pill ideology.

That’s what makes red pill truths mandatory for a healthy and happy life. If you believe the Dr Phil/Oprah propaganda, which is just a global vulnerability shit-test sanctioned and maintained by the feminine imperative – you are destined to be excluded from the sexual marketplace (INCEL), and betasized beyond repair.

Rollo, we all need to know this stuff (consciously) – now more than ever. Thanks.

Had dinner the other night with a recently divorced friend who suddenly adopted the Red Pill quite naturally. He didn’t read about it he just woke up. He’s killing it right now banging 10s and realising his ex was divorce raping him so he took measures.

When I told him about the Red I’ll and game it came as a relief that there was some how this body of work and whole movement lending to support to this awakening he was experiencing.

It got me thinking after reading this post…all men have it in them but will they summon it?

@Rugby… go easy on the spamming and video clogs…let others comment for a change…

Women are limited to their own understanding and feminine views of their world. A man’s never gonna understand periods or childbirth from a 3rd person perspective, and neither will a woman understand the male experience in 1st person.

Case studies and 1st hand accounts of transgenders who’ve flipped are enough (as if more proof of experience was needed) that the female experience is so totally different to the male experience of being that anyone who considered them equal should have been ranked amongst the dumbest human beings alive.

The truth about male power is that men have always generated power and other men and women have respected it. Civilization has seen much worse and men arose who fashioned empires despite everything they had to face. Even today’s red pillers are a far cry from those characters. I’m not saying everything they did was ‘good’ (a lot of it was deplorable stuff too), but strictly from an analytical perspective, they acquired and wielded power in a way that very few men would do today.

Women cannot and will not give a man any power, nor will they respect a man who has no power of his own. Men must generate and take power.

It is amusing to me hearing women I know now introduce me to other people as “the most charming asshole I’ve ever met”. I’m a jerk. I’ve done no favors for them compared to my old Beta self. I’ve probably told them they’re wrong about everything they say I should do. They bitch to high hell about “Why the HELL do I like you so much?! STOP IT.” But they still introduce me as the most charming asshole they’ve ever met.

You are correct, Rollo. Women should be denied the opportunity to define masculinity from their perspective for their own good. They love what they get when they can’t control it.

Hi Rollo, could you check your Facebook messages? I sent “The Rational Male” page on fb a message and would like to discuss something I think you’ve never quite touched on, something that I think is very important.

‘Where have all the real men gone’ …. Ive heard this so often from women all over the world in my travels last year, Europe, US, Australia. However, unlike Rollos point, I felt the majority of these women really are crying for the loss of the masculine male. I definitely dont see the epidemic as strongly as it seems to be portrayed here. I believe deep down most of the women I speak to, as friends and lovers know something is very wrong between the sexes. They inherently feel they ‘need’ a masculine influence backin their lives, but they dont know how to go about it.

And a comment about ‘vulnerability’. There are different degrees to vulnerability. You dont want to put your head on your womans lap and start telling her all your issues. However, its OK to tell her that youre having work challenges or issues within your familly, brother, parents. But the key thing is lettin her know you are working on it, it will be fine and youre taking leadership and the necssary steps to address those points. She still needs to feel youre human, with imperfections, able to be vulnerable but with enough strenght and resolve to confidently get past those challenges.

Agree that the school-shootings-because-of-toxic-masculinity and all-masculinity-is-toxic narratives are real, in themselves toxic and bullshit, of course.

But am doubtful about this:

“Nikolas Cruz, like many other teenage shooters is the product of this feminine-primary education system, not a Patriarchal “teach boys not to cry” machismo school. He is a monster of their creation; one taught to cry on demand and emote like a girl. He’s the result of a participation trophy mentality that demonize men and masculinity to the point that he never learns how to bounce back from defeat, rejection or simply life’s adversities. No men and no masculinity is available to teach that kid how to harden up and be resilient, or how that masculine discipline is not bullying or hazing, but a necessary part of a boy’s maturation into a masculine man.”

It occurs to me that Nikolas Cruz, like Elliot Rodger, was simply to far lost and gone for any narrative to reach him. Say some positive masculine sports teacher or older brother or other father figure who’d tell him that he’ll get over his break up and 100 problems but a bitch ain’t none and so on … I don’t see this reaching a guy like Cruz anymore, or maybe at no time in his life. I have no way of knowing but I feel that boys like Rogers and Cruz would be suffering, hurting and off in any kind of imperative-structured society, male or female. They’d reject positive male influences in their life, they are too far in their own solipsistic hermetically closed off dank reality.

It IS true of course that he was brought up and conditioned in a female imperative narrative, tho. So there is that. Maybe a different conditioning from an early age could have prevented this horrible shit and would in the future. And of course that outlook is much more viable and positive than saying some boys are simply lost and there will always be some of this fucked up horror, no matter the narratives. And it is important to push back against the this-is-because-all-masculinity-is-toxic tales on a meta societal level. So I don’t know. I just look at pictures of Cruz and wonder which kind of positive male authority could reach this boy.

Also special propz for this paragraph:

“As you might’ve guessed, this social dynamic conflicts with women’s Hypergamous imperatives. A Beta who thinks he’s a ‘man’ and presumes entitlements because of that is a woman’s worst fear. A Beta transgressing into a manhood that the imperative didn’t give him is the making for a guy being considered a sexual predator. However, an Alpha man, a man of high sexual market value still needs to accept the feminine-correct social frame, but he must also know his role within that frame.”

Lol, see how tricky this shit is? Masculinity defined by the female imperative: we can’t have some Beta imagining he’s a jock and crossing boundaries, that’s harassment and rape. (Also very understandable out of a female perspective.) But then we can’t have the Alpha seeing the Beta thrown in jail and then NOT cross boundaries, Jesus, he’s supposed to GET IT. Man up already, pussy!!! And then you get a large demographic of heterosexual males looking at this and going, whatever bitch, I’ll be off smoking weed, playing video games and jacking off to anime porn, get happy in the world you created. I’m out. And who can blame them?

Stumbled over this sentence tho:

“I’ve made the comparison in the past that women only see men as either draft animals or breeding stock.”

For some reason (maybe my own female imperative conditioning, I know, lol) the word women in this context appears to me as a generalization. Maybe it’d be better to say “the female imperative” sees men as either draft animals or breeding stock, or “the female imperative and it’s agents” … otherwise it’s the equivalent to saying men see women as either whores or angels. Now do some men see women like that. Of course. Many men. Sure. Does this outlook sort of logically evolve out of mens sexual strategy and (false) social conditioning? Arguably, yeah. But do MEN see women as either whores or angels? Fuck no. I don’t, for one. Not because of blue-pill wightknightism but because out of a red pill paradigm I know that it’s bullshit, a harmful generalization and pedestalisation. And so on.

So feel free to tell me to shut up with SJW semantics bullhist but it seems to me that it’s important to differentiate in the wording here. What makes Rollos essays so great is that some female imperative conditioned guy (like myself once) can find his work and having been told those red pill dudes on the net are hateful misogynistic assholes and racist too, can start reading and go, well, that’s simply stone cold deductive logic for the most part, there is no feelz and dogma and cult like believe systems. That’s just empirical evidence about intersexual dynamics based on biology and evolutionary theory. Whether you like what this proposes or not, you can’t argue with the factual reality it describes, because it is all around you. You may forcefully reject it and close your eyes, but it’s still there.

So a sentence like “women only see men as either draft animals or breeding stock” works against this because the same female imperative conditioned guy can read this and then goes, ah there it is. My own mother does not see men as draft animals or breeding stock, this is disgusting. These guys simply hate women!!

Plenty of blue pill pussies shaming other men here all the time. I always find it funny how many men here clutch their pearls when I speak to men like a man. The way I speak to men who I perceive as full of shit here is the way men used to deal with each other regularly. We enforced social order roughly, it wasn’t pleasant. You’d get told to “fuck off” or whatever pretty regularly.

In no particular order…

Nikolas Cruz – Uhh, he had all the classic markers of psychopathy. He was a late bedwetter, obsessed with fire and killed animals for pleasure – ding ding ding, winner winner, chicken dinner. There is zero surprise to Cruz. No educational system – masculine or femcentric would change him or have fixed him. Such people need to be locked up. Period.

The past 60 years… The main shortcoming of Rollo’s analyses here is his singular focus on intersexual relations. What it fails to explain is why/how the femcentric order gained so much traction so suddenly? Why did women get so much political power? How did it actually happen? Women and men have been jousting with each other forever for power in our social order. Why did women suddenly run the table in the past 60 years? Gosh, what is different?

One needs to see the Prog-Marxist/NeoMarxist enablement of feminism as just another front in the class war of the Left clearly in order to understand why this movement has achieved so much power. It was the Left that called for “The Long March” through American cultural institutions in the ’60s, the post-modernists, the neo-marxists – this is exactly what they called for. And exactly what their minions did over the past 60 years. It’s not women that are the problem, it’s our politics.

For those of you who don’t understand why it’s the left, I pity you. If you actually want to understand where things went wrong, go back and read Hegel. Read up on German Historicism and how this idea of “progress” is actually a myth designed to permit the construction of a totalitarian govt. A govt that of course entitles and empowers a self-anointed elite to design and run our society utterly. Not unlike the “legalism” of China which underlied its Confucian and Communist eras, and is now shown to the world with it’s snarl and teeth so clearly by Xi now…

You might even find out who actually founded fascism He was Italian, and he was a rabid leftist and Progressive. And oh yeah – you’ve never heard of him because his existence conclusively proves that Fascism was always a project of the Left, not the right. I bet it will be hard for you to even find his name. Okay, I won’t tease anymore. The creator of Fascism was Giovanni Gentile, and he posited that Fascism was a form of Socialism, which it certainly is (it’s just not communism, socialism doesn’t imply communism at all).

Question: How many of you even know this? How many of you are thrown to dismiss all this left-right talk as irrelevant? (fyi, that is the best trick the Left accomplished, it started with McCarthy who has actually been proved correct by history) If you think it’s all just nonsense, then the burden is back on you to explain how all this ran amok over the past 60 years. What changed? Did women suddenly become more powerful auto-magically? Did our institutions just change without any action taken by individuals and political forces? What is your explanation for why women’s priorities and the victimization meme have become so central to our politics and social order? Why didn’t it happen 500 years ago? 1000?

With the engine of our Leftist politics being internalized by every institution of society, Blue Pilling and being bought into the femcentric social order is nothing short of a society-wide gaslighting of men. A Blue Pill man actually is walking around with a false consciousness, alienated from himself and others in society.

And for the majority of you who don’t know Marx, you won’t recognize that this is what Marx claimed “Capitalism” (what is capitalism anyway?) did to individuals in society. That it atomized us, alienated us from our true natures and social contact etc. It’s amazing how the Left never fails to project its worst aspects onto its enemies.

Without putting the politics/social drivers outside of intersexual relations into the model, you will never fully understand what’s happening to us. And without understanding our enemy, we cannot defeat him. Hence why the right/men/white folk are scrambling and losing territory every day…

” . . . start time seems to correlate with the ready availability of mass communication i.e. radio, television, so that by the 1960s . . .”

Gutenberg was not in the business of selling Bibles. The Bible was the demo. Gutenberg was in the business of selling moveable type printing presses, a business that proved to be a smashing success. Within 20 years of the Bible pressing Europe was awash in popular novels and newspapers, being pumped out of nearly every town big enough to stable at least 4 horses.

The mass media was born.

Yes, it travelled a bit slower than it does now, but it travelled, and communication always travels at the speed of life. If the news that the regulars had turned out reached Lexington only at the speed of a horse, the regular army itself only travelled at the speed of men on foot.

The news travelled plenty fast enough to assemble the local militia, which is the relevant speed of communication.

@scribblerg: “The main shortcoming of Rollo’s analyses here is his singular focus on intersexual relations. What it fails to explain is why/how the femcentric order gained so much traction so suddenly?”

“Without putting the politics/social drivers outside of intersexual relations into the model, you will never fully understand what’s happening to us.”

I have been a reader of this blog only for the last two years. But I know one thing that Rollo has made is very clear that he wants to discuss “Red Pill” only in regard to inter-sexual dynamics. He does not want to discuss whether it is the left or the right who is responsible for the state we find ourselves in.

Rollo’s objective / mission with this blog is to Red Pill men with respect to inter sexual dynamics and “help men make themselves into better men”. It is not Rollo’s mission to challenge the left or right or to fight on behalf of men on the political front. He does not give prescriptions – as explained in the post “No Prescriptions”. What men do with this knowledge is up to them. Some men learn Game, make themselves their MPO and get good at getting women, some go MGTOW, some go the MRA route, some decide to go further down the rabbits hole to discover what lies beneath it all “who is responsible?”, “how do we change this?”.

I read your comment carefully and I agree with everything you have written, but we should limit political discussions only to the extent they help us in understanding inter sexual dynamics. There are many alt-right blogs to discuss the political issues and concerns.

The men who come to this site are looking for solutions to make “their own life” better first. And when men start to change (one man at a time), the political narrative challenged.

I’ve read the book Shadow Men. The author talks about the strategy to crush the traditional family unit way back in the 20s. The book mentions, for example, how in one of the earliest Macy’s Day Parades, they paid women to ride the floats and smoke cigarettes as a show of independence and defiance. They paid for newspaper ads to further promote this image. The fix was in way back then. They knew if they could split up the family unit and convince half of the population (females) to enter the workforce, they would have doubled the workforce, which would allow them to reduce wages accordingly. This is a long march indeed.

My argument is to differentiate wording away from “women only see men as either draft animals or breeding stock” or “men see women as bitches” not because it makes me feel bad (it doesn’t) or it ain’t true (it is), but because in this general form it seems counterproductive and an easy trap for accusations of stereotypical thinking and rejecting the realities it represents.

Even adding “women subconsciously see man as either draft animals” … or “as part of their hardwired sexual strategy women perceive man as either” … or something would add more context and still be no less true.

@Rollo: Another great article Rollo. And this sentence below serves as a warning to every blue pilled beta.

“A Beta who thinks he’s a ‘man’ and presumes entitlements because of that is a woman’s worst fear. A Beta transgressing into a manhood that the imperative didn’t give him is the making for a guy being considered a sexual predator.”

Yes. Trying to swallow the elephant whole won’t work for the average man and might just drive him insane. I watched Rollo’s latest appearance in a roundtable discussion talking about the Florida shooting, and he stressed again that he prefers to keep the political and racial stuff out of his work unless it’s pertinent to intersexual dynamics.

The incursion of the alt-right ideology into red pill, or the attempts to interject it, will only hinder men’s true understanding in favor of anger and hate and raises the possibility of mindless violence – enter the Florida shooter replete with his violent threats, racist rhetoric and finally mass murder.

Yeah, that shit really helped him as a young, impressional male.

Masculinity is being redifined as angry, hateful and homicidal. Full stop. Men with better understanding need to assist in quashing the hateful politically driven nonsense falling into red pill from alt right ideologies. There are indeed plenty of places for that, and they are excellent echo chambers.

2. Women who DO NOT think the above have their identity under assault.

3. Men can protect anyone they want to protect but should only CONTINUE to protect women who they have sex with.

4. Honor, should be for men who are strong enough to enforce the borders of a country that serves the interests of MEN.

5……Therefore, our male paradigm has been needled and cherry-picked by weak men who sought to destroy our nation from within, and their effort will continue to be reinforced by stupid men who seek to perpetuate their bullshit as a form of DHV. Even just to finally get to feel like men.

6. So, having the carrot of sex for service rejected. Evil people will replace that carrot with validation.

Well now at least I’ll know what to have the stream talks about.The culture war is about numbers and courage.

That’s also what all these shooting are about. They’re about the left gathering all the precedents they need to force people in electoral positions to vote their way.

We need to get moving. Get this word out. Women don’t have a right to know what’s in your head.

Re: KFG and VoxDay, lmfao. Just so we’re clear, Vox is calling for what essentially would look like a feudal social order. He never quite describes this clearly, but if you understand his criticism of classical liberalism (and some of the fruitcake “philosophers” he listens to), you get this is where he wants to take us. He will claim he doesn’t have some grand plan etc., which is true, as far as it goes. Vox sees the very idea of equality under the law and democracy as problematic.

So you can follow him, he’s certainly much more of a consistent and realistic and deep source of analysis than say Richard Spencer or that gibbering moron Allsup. He’s “the racist of choice for intellectuals”, @KFG, seems perfect for you…If you want a good laugh, go read up on the economist Keen that Vox loves so dearly…But hey, most people aren’t as smart as Vox or as well read, so he seems to have all the answers. But if you are as smart and have done the same reading, well…

Yeah, let’s keep “the political and racial stuff” out of this conversation, cuz hey, that strategy is working so well for us, right? We are losing, not winning. Perhaps some of you have noticed?

Let me break this down so even Blax can understand it. (He’s not stupid, he’s probably got an IQ of about 115-118, which for a black guy is pretty fucking smart, but he’s not with a bunch of black guys here…). Looking at what’s happening with the femcentric order without understanding the politics at work is like trying to understand physics by only studying Newtonian physics, while ignoring particle physics. You will always be confused by some behavior in the natural world if you just stick with Newtonian physics. Same with the Red Pill – if you only look at intersexual issues, you will miss what they are actually up to.

I mean, do you guys even understand what “intersectional feminism” is? “Intersectionality” (what folks like Anita Sarkesian crow about) is a neo-marxist, post modern reinterpretation of feminism. IT IS WHY THINGS HAVE GONE SO FUCKING CRAZY. And it necessarily drags race and politics right into the center of what’s going on with women.

It doesn’t matter that you don’t understand this, the war is proceeding without you and without giving a shit about what you think, actually. The Left already effectively controls most institutions of our society. They control our digital ecosystems for fuck’s sake. This is why electing a bunch of Republicans doesn’t seem to fix anything much…

Of course, if you ‘get it’, you’ll realize nothing short of revolution is a sufficient response. And for me, I don’t have the stomach for that much blood. So I enjoy the decline, and tell myself things like “Why shouldn’t I live in a society in decline? Most humans live in politically awful societies, under govts that are crap, with deranged elitists run amok. Why not me?”

But I don’t kid myself. Up thread I think @IH was trying to say the demonization of women is counterproductive, and I agree. We can’t just keep reiterating the issues with the femcentric culture we are in, it doesn’t change anything. People see Trump’s election as a signal of support for the Red Pill, but in fact, it merely signifies how insane the left’s ideas have become. Remember, Trump beat a corrupt, hated, ugly, fat old nasty hag – it wasn’t really that hard. She was the absolutely worst candidate the Dems could have fielded. Trump merely stood up and said what most people thought. That this is seen as so different is a comment on just how far to the Left our culture has been driven, not about the success of our movement. We are a pimple on the ass of progress. Rollo is so insignificant the femcrazies don’t even bother going after him.

Just so we’re clear, Vox is calling for what essentially would look like a feudal social order.

Don’t read Vox, but it seems we end up in this territory either way. I see legions of serfs every day… and burghers, masters, Lords. Those who are king in all but name. At least in an actual feudal system there was an expectation of a degree of noblesse oblige.

Vox sees the very idea of equality under the law and democracy as problematic.

Sitting here in Teh Current Year, I see the same thing. All around us the limitations of democracy are on display, the contract of government to its people frayed if not broken outright. equality today is lowest common denominator.

Nothing to inspire.

Knowing what we know – could you really ever consider a woman an equal?

i did fall outta my mom’s personhood canal, so they might have a point

“That’s also what all these shooting are about.”

these shootings, like building 7, are about creating massive cog dis. everyone fucking knows that building was pulled. the ones who pulled it know we know. they dare us to do something about it. and we don’t. so they shoot some more “kids” lol.

it’s a game. pickup is a game. life is a game. might as well have fun while you play

They take free public domain sources (such as Project Gutenberg) collate, format and add supplementary material (criticisms, biographies, photographs) of authors, all for a couple of bucks. Can save you hours, per author. If you buy direct, they’re DRM free.

Huckleberry Finn
Great Expectations
The Three Musketeers

Coming of age stories of different times and places. Coming of age stories are important. They not only depict the transition from childhood to manhood, but in the process must inherently depict what “manhood” is being aimed for.

A new book, but from ancient sources, Watership Down. How young adults start a civilization from scratch. That may become a necessary thing to know for any now young man. The times, they are a changin’.

A newer autobiography, Wanderer, by Sterling Hayden. Important from a TRM perspective, because it transitions from being a boy commercial fishing under sail to contemporary times, and shows how one of the last of the manly men got zeroed out by being all blue pill fucked in the head, how he got that way and what he ended up doing about it.

Don’t do real reading on your tablety thingamabob. Find the hundred bucks to get a real ereader if you have to pawn your underwear to do it.

“Yeah, let’s keep “the political and racial stuff” out of this conversation, cuz hey, that strategy is working so well for us, right? We are losing, not winning. Perhaps some of you have noticed?”

I hear you on the marxism and the post modernism, this however is not necessarily due or caused by a particular race. Once we go down the race road, we end up with tribalism based on raced, which will inevitably end up in conflict, not the preferred outcome.

Some races have been used for certain purposes by the cultural marxists no doubt. Careful about going down the racial road man, it’s a dead end.

Rollo, your blog (along with the ZFG-style Chateau) has become regular reading for me. I have to say, your blog has really helped consolidate ideas that have been floating around in my head for years. If there was a curriculum in “manosphere studies”, your blog would be the required reading for the upper level final year courses to help the students bring all the material together.

It has helped me in my personal life and it has allowed me to build a solid sustainable masculine mental point of origin for everything I do. I recommend you look into writing about stoicism as well. It’s a good way of dealing with some of the hard truths our learning takes us to. I know Roosh has his faults, but I like the times he has dealt into stoicism. I think it would be a good addition to your writings.

” . . . if you only look at intersexual issues, you will miss what they are actually up to.”

TRP is the physics. Social engineering is, well, the engineering.

Which one has the other as its base?

If you don’t understand the underlying foundation, you won’t understand the practice.

And thus fail to understand what might be done about it.

re: Vox Day. He has called for pure democracy. You have read Marx and Engels, ergo you are a commie?

He has no grand plan, because he predicts (not advocates) that the matter will be settled the old fashioned way, which is beyond anything he can affect on any scale beyond doing his best to take care of his own.

“There has been a definite change over the last six years.
Lots of older men have simply stopped pursuing and checked out.
There is also a serious change in social behaviour in that betas are totally avoiding any contact with women.

I thought it was my imagination but it’s not. The gender balance in mixed Meetup groups in the UK which is the ‘go to’ place for singletons to meet has skewed to about an 80/20 split from a 50/50.”

That’d be the logical consequence of metoo, rape hysteria and the shifting of gears of the F.I. in recent years. Can’t really say I am able to observe this in my corner of the world yet, but it definitely happens and must happen until the narratives change again.

Your DNA wants two things: Survival and Replication. Once the risk to clumsily ask a girl out literally threatens to wreck your life in being branded as a rapist and harasser online forever, your survival instinct kicks in and average men (betas) en large won’t “aks out” girls anymore. The risk is to great, the reward to little.

Testosterone won’t go anywhere, men will still crave physical intimacy, sex and female companionship. But these urges are forced to find other outlets since for the average dude asking women out or trying to approach them in a sexual context literally threatens his life.

Prostitution, porn and other buffers will bloom. Women at bars and in social settings will remain unapproached.

It’s highly unfortunate that men are assuming the only alternative to the Leftist things Scrib is referring to is the alt-right.

Why the hell is that? Sane rational men need not gravitate to nationalism and racist shit. One does not need to seek out the alt-right in order to find alternatives to the status quo.

There is more than one red pill….or so a few guys have mentioned.

@Fleezer, you’re reference to Building 7 nailed it.

It’s all Game, but multi-dimensional. Sure as hell we need to take the bottoms up approach. At the same time it’s not rational to bury our heads in the sand when the social order is changing. The same people who order #7 to be pulled are ideologically aligned with using the FI to weaken men and continue their strategy.

“I’ve made the comparison in the past that women only see men as either draft animals or breeding stock.”

this is just BB or AF… and those two algos really don’t overlap…

For some reason (maybe my own female imperative conditioning, I know, lol)

props on the self-analysis…lol

the word women in this context appears to me as a generalization.

you’re not wrong…lol… it’s either AWALT or not… and yes, that IS a ‘generalization’…lol… which is never the less true…

Maybe it’d be better to say “the female imperative” sees men as either draft animals or breeding stock, or “the female imperative and it’s agents” …

how’s that FI treatin’ ya?…lol

really try to feeel that hand on your shoulder… do you really not want to attach that generalization/realization to ALL girls?… why not?…

otherwise it’s the equivalent to saying men see women as either whores or angels. Now do some men see women like that. Of course. Many men. Sure.

= NAWALT… = FI induced BP…

Does this outlook sort of logically evolve out of mens sexual strategy and (false) social conditioning? Arguably, yeah. But do MEN see women as either whores or angels? Fuck no. I don’t, for one. Not because of blue-pill wightknightism but because out of a red pill paradigm I know that it’s bullshit, a harmful generalization and pedestalisation. And so on.

exactly… so do you understand that ALL girls are whores AND angels?…lol… and which one YOU get depends on which one of their algos (AF or BB) that YOU trigger?… sooo, why would you not want that BP dude looking for answers to have that accurate knowledge?… serious question… who benefits from that?… (hint – it starts with ‘F’ and ends with ‘I’…lol)

So a sentence like “women only see men as either draft animals or breeding stock” works against this because the same female imperative conditioned guy can read this and then goes, ah there it is. My own mother does not see men as draft animals or breeding stock, this is disgusting. These guys simply hate women!!

aaand, THAT guy^^^ is not going to ‘Just Get It ™’… = choke down the RP (which is bitter btw…lol)… bc he is still holding on to that BP monkey trap nut of NAWALT… (bc yes, that does include your mom…lol)… and if he DOES accept the ‘RP’ with that caveat, is he really better off?… does he really have accurate info?… or is he more likely to stall out on his RP acceptance, when in the future, has to take even another ‘step’ to get to real RP… bc that last one he swallowed wasn’t actually ‘real’?… again, who/what benefits from that?

the FI is cunning and pervasive…

My argument is to differentiate wording away from “women only see men as either draft animals or breeding stock” or “men see women as bitches” not because it makes me feel bad (it doesn’t) or it ain’t true (it is), but because in this general form it seems counterproductive and an easy trap for accusations of stereotypical thinking and rejecting the realities it represents.

sooo, rather than just tell the straight up reality, you are suggesting that Rollo try to sugar-coat the message to not offend some BP guy’s view of ‘women’?…lol… really try to feeel that hand on your shoulder…

Even adding “women subconsciously see man as either draft animals” … or “as part of their hardwired sexual strategy women perceive man as either” … or something would add more context and still be no less true.

bc that completely absolves da girls of ANY badness on their part, right?…lol… feeel that hand pushing on you…

I was 18, E1, in boot camp. It wasn’t all that hard work. It was mentally difficult for some tho.

The DI yelled for a volunteer, I volunteered, and maintained the cleaning closet and the DI offices. (Later learned this is called the “house mouse”). I used the position to keep away from toilet duty and dig through to the goodie package closet for my friends and distribute contraband food and such. It worked out well for all.

There was one guy (there’s always one) who soon after Day 1 would go “sick call ranger” and leave training every morning and then ride the bus around post for much of the day. He did this a lot.

At the end of boot camp the E-4 platoon lead brings us squad leaders together. (I happened to be one by week two, not sure how that happened.)

He says he was covertly ordered by DI to blanket party this lazy non-conforming, soon to be drop out Sick-call..

O.k. I was the smart egghead of the group (go ahead and laugh), saw Full Metal Jacket enough so I put together a plan for the group.

Tje 4 Squad leaders would nighttime slip into his barracks room to hold him down under his blanket. They were to do nothing else. Three other guys from each squad would wail on the dude until platoon leader calls them off. I thought it was a good to go….as long as everyone stuck to their role.

Right away this lanky squad leader, says he’s going to pop him with one arm while doing his other job, holding. Fuck, I knew this guy was a problem already.

Lanky had a little paramilitary training in high school and lorded it over everyone all basic. The thing is he was kinda like Rob, all the answers, but no results where it counts. He wasn’t fast, strong, smart nor a decent combination. Kinda a perfect combo of arrogance, incompetence, and laziness to piss everyone off but not enough to care.

The party goes off kinda as planned. Sick-call got pounded but by the end slides out and I jump him with a modified rear naked lock, hooks in. I told everyone to flee while I’m atop him.

I’m not a tough guy, he wasn’t a pussy, so I knew I was in for it if I let go. When I did, I scat away, he came up for vengeance, and caught up with me in the hall.

Cat-quick the Platoon leader sails out of a side room striking him squarely on the chin knocking him off. I’m now back to my room.

Next day Sick-call reports to DI he was attacked and knows who done it.

DI: “You don’t worry about that.”

Anyways the next few days were hairy as scores were settled. I wasn’t a target…but guess who got thumped?

Know-it-all lanky squad leader guy! Who’d a thunk being Beta acting Alpha is dangerous? He got it good as he had no chops beyond strutting around with his E-3. He looked like a wounded puppy in next day’s formation.

I was born in 1961. Smack dab in the middle of conflict and chaos. It was what was for breakfast every single day.

As I’ve mentioned thousands of times, the blue pilled religious brainwashed merit based ideology showed itself as an illusion for as long as I can remember.

The greater masses of disillusioned men coming to this realization currently are very very late. Yet I can empathize greatly with the anger, depression, suicide and dropping out many men are facing and trying to cope with. I intrinsically understand. They were sold a bill of goods that wasn’t what it represented itself as, but most couldn’t see the active signs right under their noses for the past 60 years or longer in some respects.

The tenets for destroying manhood and masculinity have been perfected over many generations, and they have now been deployed by the FI against all males.

What we desperately need to understand is that demasculinized men are a great danger to all men. Moreso than feminist women. Itnis extremely sick that ” they ” are targeting all of us, and in turn we target ” us ” also. Unconscious cooperation with those that seek your replacement, capitulation and ultimately, your destruction. A relatively small group wielding massive influence.

But, that’s what men have been trained to do. Follow the leader unquestioned and join the herd to prosper.

With regard to @scribblerg commenting on how far left our society has become:

As an official old fart (60), it’s shocking how successful the left has been at subverting our culture and institutions. And it’s obvious that women have been used as a tool by the left to help cause this radical shift in our society.

Socialists understood that they had to remove the bulwark of strong traditionally minded men from the family, the education system, the media, the courts, corporations, in effect, the entire culture.

It hasn’tONLY been the ” left ” or ” socialist ” historically that sought to target and remove men from families. Not historically accurate, and that ” history ” is just as available as the socialist imperatives. Hell, it predates it.

I see married women desperately unhappy too. Looking for a spark and not finding it.

One I run into every week:

She sees me and the LTR and decided that she wants me and will divide me from the LTR. I play along. The LTR pretends not to notice – it has been happening so regularly over time that she has learned how to play.

So I flirt heavily. And go home with the LTR.

We (LTR and me) have noticed she is starting to send overt sexual signals in a very non-sexual environment (a machine shop). She has nice ta-tas and has begun showing them off more overtly. We both laugh.

And I use this woman for my dread game. What I would like to do with her and to her. The LTR is more attached to me than ever..

My point is that it is not just young singles who are .unhappy with the society they have created.

I can second this. I mean, you probably won’t find much of the wit (the female art of seduction has long given way to just overt sluttiness) and you won’t be able to escape the entitlement (without a country change, that is…), but the experience and cute figure are quite doable. Granted I’m struggling a bit here in Austin, but it ain’t because they venue didn’t deliver a change. Lawdy it did.

Rollo chooses to niche and concentrate on intersexual dynamics. For knowing so much about socialism, it surprises me that you would urge Rollo to get into the political, racial fray even though by doing so, he’d most likely become a primary target, and his readers in corporate America may get his site banned from their viewing privileges.

Let the man niche. We’re smart enough to find the other sites that talk about that other shit.

When I was young, I read all about slavery in America. Decades later, I read that some 98% of slave ships were owned by Jewish folks. I was like, ‘Damn why didn’t I ever hear of this?” When I was young, I learned all about Columbus and him discovering the Americas in 1492. Decades later, I read that Jewish folks were kicked out of Spain in 1492. I was like, “Damn why didn’t I ever hear of this?” Now, just by me writing these few sentences, someone could accuse me of being an anti-sammy. Also, I happened to be born white, so in order to enjoy this life and my own personal self, logically, I must be proud of my characteristics. Now, just for me writing that, someone may label me an alt-right bigot. So, it’s stupid for Rollo to even dip his toe into these waters because that gives socialists enough of a foothold to label him an enemy. And that would suck for ALL OF US.

The most important thing I’ve learned from Red Pill essays and discussions is that you don’t discuss your challenges with your woman. That type of partnership just doesn’t work.

When you’re struggling with something, discuss it with men who know how to solve your problem and can give you good advice. But don’t discuss it with your woman. She’ll give advice or suggestions that generally won’t work for you. She’ll resent you for giving her something else to worry about (your competence, their future), and she’ll resent you when you ignore her advice. And that’s when the shit tests will start… again.

With your woman, it’s best to give her the impression that life is easy for you. When it clearly isn’t easy for you, don’t explain what’s going on, just state what’s observable. (I need to work longer hours this week, or whatever.)

“I would think the unhappy switch is turned on in most women mid 30’s and that’s where it stays.”

Yeah that’s true (YaReally wrote about how he avoiding 30+ year old women). I stick to venues with young girls (20-28). Main reason I wanted to bang 30-38 year old chicks was just to prove to myself that I could but it may not even be worth it:

That’s fair and to each his own. I’m suggesting though that rolling into positive feedback loops is just a low rung on the game ladder. If you choose to go further a next step is taking these now dead women and turning them on to you. This is where Game really starts. Turning these situations around.

No requirement to do this of course.

At the end of the day Game is about psychological domination, do as much or as little as you enjoy.

Yeah, if you’re looking for mid 30s chicks Dallas is full of them. Just not my thing. Moving to more of a college town worked wonders for me. Dallas has a lot of desperate 30ish chicks screaming toward the wall though. They’ll hurl themselves at you with everything they’ve got.

I don’t like going into specifics and trying to lead anyone into anything other than rational thought. Lots of people find overtness offensive and instead of looking at truth, work hard to discount it as ” feelz ” or whatever. That’s why I said that the information is readily available.

Plenty of women will go after you 1 on 1. The number who will do it in the presence of their rival is small. And they are way more dedicated. Until they figure it is useless. The advantages of having a partner with ONE-itis.

The LTR loves giving the rival every advantage and then taking me back by wanting me more than the rival. It confirms her (female) strength. Yeah. she has her own GAME. Which works to my benefit. And of course the rival confirm her choice.

Or see just how fast you can make everything happen. Gotta admit even I was shocked by the first time I pulled a chick in less than 5 minutes in front of a friend. Or the many times I’ve had women hop in the sack the first time meeting me in person (happened a few times even when I was Blue Pill). Or how many different ones you can bang in a 24 hour period (think mine is 3)….

It was a misunderstanding on my part, I did not get that “draft animals or breeding stock” is meant as AF/BB underlying and transcending all areas of society.

I (wrongly) understood it as “women o n l y perceiving men as “draft animals or breeding stock as direct sexual strategy” i.e. no other dimensions of interaction or perception possible, like say a woman talking to her pastor or the electrician or the guy behind the counter or whatever the fuck.

But you are correct, AF/BB as a sexual strategy underlying all interactions is an undeniable fact insofar that even the state as as the ultimate beta (divorce rape and alimony) or your “invisible service men” like the electrician and the guy behind the counter and shit of course all fall into AF/BB.

I did not mean NAWALT with regards to AF/BB tho, I meant that this is not the only dimension for women possible interacting with men because I misunderstood the “draft animals or breeding stock” as direct sexual strategy, i.e. an “Alpha” making a move on a woman or a “Beta” making a move on a woman with the end result in sex.

Fucking language barrier but does it come across what I am trying to say lol?

So I was not suggesting to sugar coat red pill truths to make them go down easier, I was trying to say you need the context that this is sexual strategy which I misunderstood (or thought too short) as direct action, and that there are areas which are not “direct sexual strategy” in which a woman interacts with a man.

So disregard my criticism, I did not get it right.

Much thanks for replying and clarifying this for me tho, food for thought!

Rollo chooses to niche and concentrate on intersexual dynamics. For knowing so much about socialism, it surprises me that you would urge Rollo to get into the political, racial fray even though by doing so, he’d most likely become a primary target, and his readers in corporate America may get his site banned from their viewing privileges.

Let the man niche. We’re smart enough to find the other sites that talk about that other shit.

Totally agree about Rollo and his niche. Rollo knows what he is doing and doesn’t need Scribber, you or myself to tell him what to do. We all touch on politics enough that Rollo doesn’t need to, unless it’s necessary for context.

About becoming a target…the cat is already out of the bag. SJWs will get just as riled up about a blog on masculinity as they will on socialism. Do some driveby visits to a few online forums and you can see how freaky the shit gets when someone mentions the word masculinity and does not preface it with the word toxic. I check the SPLC website now and then just to see who has been added. It will come as no surprise when TRM is targeted for misogyny. The racist crap cannot live here. I liked your stories about history. You’re spot on, that stuff will be taken out of context immediately and is a sure way to get blacklisted.